discovery-process

name discovery-process argument-hint [problem hypothesis] description Run a full discovery cycle from problem hypothesis to validated solution. Use when a team needs a structured path through framing, interviews, synthesis, and experiments. intent Guide product managers through a complete discovery cycle—from initial problem hypothesis to validated solution—by orchestrating problem framing, customer interviews, synthesis, and experimentation skills into a structured process. Use this to systematically explore problem spaces, validate assumptions, and build confidence before committing to full development—avoiding "build it and they will come" syndrome and ensuring you're solving real customer problems. type workflow theme discovery-research best_for ["Running a full discovery cycle from hypothesis to validated solution","Investigating a retention or churn problem systematically","Setting up continuous discovery as an ongoing practice"] scenarios ["I have a hypothesis that B2B customers struggle with onboarding and want to validate it before building anything","Our activation rate dropped 15% this quarter and I need to run discovery to find out why"] estimated_time 30-60 min Purpose Guide product managers through a complete discovery cycle—from initial problem hypothesis to validated solution—by orchestrating problem framing, customer interviews, synthesis, and experimentation skills into a structured process. Use this to systematically explore problem spaces, validate assumptions, and build confidence before committing to full development—avoiding "build it and they will come" syndrome and ensuring you're solving real customer problems. This is not a one-time research project—it's a continuous discovery practice that runs in parallel with delivery, typically 1-2 discovery cycles per quarter. Input Works best with: Your starting problem hypothesis — even a rough one. Also useful: Prior research, customer access, timeline, and what decision the discovery must inform. Anything supplied with the invocation itself — text after the skill name, a pasted context dump, or an appended ARGUMENTS: line — counts as answers already given. Use it and skip whatever it covers; don't re-ask. Arriving empty-handed? That works too. The workflow starts at problem framing and helps you construct the hypothesis first. Example invocation: Run discovery on this hypothesis: SMB admins abandon onboarding because the data-import step requires IT help they don't have. Key Concepts What is the Discovery Process? The discovery process (Teresa Torres, Marty Cagan) is a structured approach to exploring problem spaces and validating solutions before building. It consists of: Frame the Problem — Define what you're investigating and why Conduct Research — Gather qualitative and quantitative evidence Synthesize Insights — Identify patterns, pain points, and opportunities Generate Solutions — Explore multiple solution options Validate Solutions — Test assumptions through experiments Decide & Document — Commit to build, pivot, or kill Why This Works De-risks product decisions: Tests assumptions before expensive builds Customer-centric: Grounds decisions in real customer problems, not internal opinions Iterative: Builds confidence progressively through small experiments Fast learning: Discovers "no-go" signals early, saves wasted effort Anti-Patterns (What This Is NOT) Not waterfall research: Discovery runs continuously, not once before dev Not user testing: Discovery validates problems; testing validates solutions Not a substitute for shipping: Discovery informs delivery, doesn't replace it When to Use This Exploring new product/feature areas Investigating retention or churn problems Validating strategic initiatives before roadmap commitment Continuous discovery (weekly customer touchpoints) When NOT to Use This For well-understood problems (move to execution) When stakeholders have already committed to a solution (address alignment first) For tactical bug fixes or technical debt (no discovery needed) Facilitation Source of Truth When running this workflow as a guided conversation, use workshop-facilitation as the interaction protocol. It defines: session heads-up + entry mode (Guided, Context dump, Best guess) one-question turns with plain-language prompts progress labels (for example, Context Qx/8 and Scoring Qx/5) interruption handling and pause/resume behavior numbered recommendations at decision points quick-select numbered response options for regular questions (include Other (specify) when useful) This file defines the workflow sequence and domain-specific outputs. If there is a conflict, follow this file's workflow logic. Application Use template.md for the full fill-in structure. This workflow orchestrates 6 phases over 2-4 weeks , using multiple component and interactive skills. Phase 1: Frame the Problem (Day 1-2) Goal: Define what you're investigating, who's affected, and success criteria. Activities 1. Run Problem Framing Canvas Use: skills/problem-framing-canvas/SKILL.md (interactive - MITRE) Participants: PM, design, engineering lead Duration: 120 minutes Output: Problem statement + "How Might We" question 2. Create Formal Problem Statement Use: skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md (component) Participants: PM Duration: 30 minutes Output: Structured problem statement with hypothesis 3. Define Proto-Personas (If Needed) Use: skills/proto-persona/SKILL.md (component) When: If target customer segment is unclear Duration: 60 minutes Output: Hypothesis-driven personas 4. Map Jobs-to-be-Done (If Needed) Use: skills/jobs-to-be-done/SKILL.md (component) When: If customer motivations are unclear Duration: 60 minutes Output: JTBD statements Outputs from Phase 1 Problem hypothesis: "We believe [persona] struggles with [problem] because [root cause], leading to [consequence]." Research questions: 3-5 questions to answer through discovery Success criteria: What would validate/invalidate the problem? Decision Point 1: Do we have enough context to start research? If YES: Proceed to Phase 2 (Research Planning) If NO: Gather existing data first: Review support tickets, churn surveys, NPS feedback Analyze product analytics (drop-off points, usage patterns) Review competitor research, market trends Time impact: +2-3 days Phase 2: Research Planning (Day 3) Goal: Design research approach, recruit participants, prepare interview guide. Activities 1. Prep Discovery Interviews Use: skills/discovery-interview-prep/SKILL.md (interactive) Participants: PM, design Duration: 90 minutes Output: Interview plan with methodology, questions, biases to avoid 2. Recruit Participants Target: 5-10 customers per discovery cycle (Teresa Torres: continuous discovery = 1 interview/week) Segment: Focus on personas from Phase 1 Recruitment channels: Existing customers (email, in-app prompts) Churned customers (exit interviews) Cold outreach (LinkedIn, communities) Incentive: $50-100 gift card or product credit Duration: 2-3 days (parallel with Phase 1) 3. Schedule Interviews Format: 45-60 min per interview (30-40 min conversation + buffer) Timeline: Spread across 1-2 weeks Recording: Get consent, record for synthesis Outputs from Phase 2 Interview guide: 5-7 open-ended questions (Mom Test style) Participant roster: 5-10 scheduled interviews Synthesis plan: How you'll capture and analyze insights Phase 3: Conduct Research (Week 1-2) Goal: Gather qualitative evidence through customer interviews. Activities 1. Conduct Discovery Interviews Methodology: From skills/discovery-interview-prep/SKILL.md (Problem validation, JTBD, switch interviews, etc.) Participants: PM + optional observer (design, eng) Duration: 5-10 interviews over 1-2 weeks Focus areas: Past behavior (not hypotheticals): "Tell me about the last time you [experienced this problem]" Workarounds: "How do you currently handle this?" Alternatives tried: "Have you tried other solutions? Why did you stop?" Pain intensity: "How much time/money does this cost you?" 2. Take Structured Notes Template: Participant: [Name, role, company size] Context: [When/where they experience problem] Actions: [What they do, step-by-step] Pain points: [Frustrations, blockers] Workarounds: [Current solutions] Quotes: [Verbatim customer language] Insights: [Patterns, surprises] 3. Review Support Tickets & Analytics (Parallel) Support tickets: Tag by theme (onboarding, feature confusion, bugs) Analytics: Identify drop-off points, feature usage, cohort behavior Surveys: Review NPS comments, exit surveys, feature requests Outputs from Phase 3 Interview transcripts: Recorded sessions + detailed notes Support ticket themes: Top 10 issues by frequency Analytics insights: Quantitative data on behavior (e.g., "60% abandon onboarding at step 3") Decision Point 2: Have we reached saturation? Saturation = same pain points emerge across 3+ interviews, no new insights If YES (saturated after 5-7 interviews): Proceed to Phase 4 (Synthesis) If NO (still learning new things): Schedule 3-5 more interviews Time impact: +1 week Phase 4: Synthesize Insights (End of Week 2) Goal: Identify patterns, prioritize pain points, map opportunities. Activities 1. Affinity Mapping (Thematic Analysis) Method: Write each insight/quote on sticky note Group by theme (e.g., "onboarding confusion," "pricing objections," "mobile access") Count frequency (how many customers mentioned each theme) Participants: PM, design, optional eng Duration: 90-120 minutes Output: Themed clusters with frequency counts 2. Create Customer Journey Map (Optional) Use: skills/customer-journey-mapping-workshop/SKILL.md (interactive) When: If pain points span multiple phases (discover, try, buy, use, support) Duration: 90 minutes Output: Journey map with opportunities ranked by impact 3. Prioritize Pain Points Criteria: Frequency: How many customers mentioned this? Intensity: How painful is it? (time wasted, money lost, emotional frustration) Strategic fit: Does solving this align with business goals? Method: Score each pain point (1-5) on frequency, intensity, strategic fit Output: Ranked list of top 3-5 pain points to address 4. Update Problem Statement Use: skills/problem-statement/SKILL.md (component) Refine based on research: Did initial hypothesis hold? Adjust if needed. Output: Validated problem statement Outputs from Phase 4 Affinity map: Themes with frequency counts Top 3-5 pain points: Prioritized by frequency × intensity × strategic fit Customer quotes: 3-5 verbatim quotes per pain point Validated problem statement: Refined based on evidence Phase 5: Generate & Validate Solutions (Week 3) Goal: Explore solution options, design experiments, validate assumptions. Activities 1. Generate Opportunity Solution Tree Use: skills/opportunity-solution-tree/SKILL.md (interactive) Input: Top 3 pain points from Phase 4 Participants: PM, design, engineering lead Duration: 90 minutes Output: 3 opportunities, 3 solutions per opportunity, POC recommendation Alternative: Use Lean UX Canvas Use: skills/lean-ux-canvas/SKILL.md (interactive) When: Prefer hypothesis-driven approach over OST Output: Hypotheses to test, minimal experiments 2. Design Experiments For each solution: Define "What's the least work to learn the next most important thing?" Experiment types: Concierge test: Manually deliver solution to 10 customers, observe Prototype test: Clickable mockup, usability test with 10 users Landing page test: Fake door test (show feature, measure interest) A/B test: Build minimal version, test with 50% of users Success criteria: What metric/behavior validates hypothesis? 3. Run Experiments Timeline: 1-2 weeks per experiment Participants: PM + design (for prototypes), eng (for A/B tests) Output: Quantitative and qualitative validation data Outputs from Phase 5 Solution options: 3-9 solutions (3 per opportunity) Experiment results: Did hypothesis validate or invalidate? Customer feedback: Qualitative reactions to prototypes/concepts Decision Point 3: Did experiments validate solution? If YES (validated): Proceed to Phase 6 (Decide & Document) If NO (invalidated): Pivot to next solution option Re-run experiments with adjusted approach Time impact: +1-2 weeks Phase 6: Decide & Document (End of Week 3-4) Goal: Commit to build, document decision, communicate to stakeholders. Activities 1. Make Go/No-Go Decision Criteria: Problem validated? (Phase 3-4) Solution validated? (Phase 5) Strategic fit? (aligns with business goals) Feasible? (engineering capacity, technical complexity) Decision: GO: Move to roadmap, write epics/stories PIVOT: Explore alternative solution KILL: De-prioritize, not worth solving now 2. Define Epic Hypotheses (If GO) Use: skills/epic-hypothesis/SKILL.md (component) Participants: PM Duration: 60 minutes per epic Output: Epic hypothesis statement with success criteria 3. Write PRD (If GO) Use: skills/prd-development/SKILL.md (workflow) Participants: PM Duration: 1-2 days Output: Structured PRD with problem, solution, success metrics 4. Communicate Findings Format: 30-min readout covering: Problem validation (Phase 3-4 insights) Solution validation (Phase 5 experiments) Recommendation (GO/PIVOT/KILL) Participants: Execs, product leadership, key stakeholders Output: Alignment on next steps Outputs from Phase 6 Decision: GO, PIVOT, or KILL Epic hypotheses: (if GO) Testable epic statements PRD: (if GO) Formal product requirements document